nhn’s national stakeholders review workshop on pakistani...

NHN’s National Stakeholders Review Workshop on Pakistani Floods Response 2012: Islamabad, 15 November, 2012

National Humanitarian NetworkNHN

Report on National Humanitarian Network’sNational Stakeholders Review Workshop on

Pakistan Floods Response 2012Islamabad, Pakistan

15 November, 2012


Acknowledgement

The National Humanitarian Network (NHN) would like to thank Sindh, Baluchistan and Punjab NHN provincial chapters & SPO for organizing and facilitating the provincial consultations as well as the national workshop. Also thanks to the community representatives & organizations for taking time out and participating in both. Also a special thanks to CARE & ACTED for their constant support in this work & UNOCHA and PHF for extending the invitations.

The workshop was organized by the National Humanitarian Network Central Executive Committee with logistical and administrative support from Strengthening Participatory Organization (SPO). Special thanks to Dr Manzoor Awan, NHN Chairperson and Deputy Executive Director, Sungi Development Foundation, for his untiring efforts and Dr. Saman Yazdani, NHN Central Executive Committee Member and Director, Centre for Health and Population Studies (CHPS), Pakistan, for moderating the Punjab and National workshops. NHN would also like to extend thanks to all the panelists at the NHN National Review Workshop on 2012 Floods Response, listed below:

Panelists:

1. Hameedullah Kakar – NHN Baluchistan Executive Committee Member2. Benjamin Barkat – NHN Punjab Executive Committee Member3. Naseer Memon – NHN Central Executive Committee Member4. Muhammad Amad – NHN KPK Executive Committee Member5. Maria Moita – Shelter cluster/TSSU National Coordinator6. Rizwan Bajwa – Food Security cluster Representative7. Elisabetta Brumat – Protection cluster National Coordinator8. Amson Simbolon – Education cluster National Coordinator9. Irfan Mufti – NHN Punjab Executive Committee Member

A very special thank you to Dr Zafar Iqbal Qadir, Chairman, and National Disaster Management Agency (NDMA) for his continued support, cooperation and participation for NHN and its activities.

And last but not the least a very special thanks to Ms. Joe Read, Mr. Aimal Khan and Mr. Azhar Ghumro plus all other staff of SPO, Islamabad office, for their consistent support and facilitation.

The NHN Central Executive Committee


Abbreviations

ACTED Agency for Technical Cooperation and Development A&D Aging and DisabilityCAP Consolidated Appeal ProcessCBDRM Community Based Disaster Risk Management CEC Central Executive Council CSO Civil Society Organizations CMDO Community Motivation and Development OrganizationCHPS Centre for Health and Population StudiesCWS Church World Service DC Deputy Commissioner D.G. Khan Dera Ghazi KhanDDMA District Disaster management Authority DRR Disaster Risk Reduction DRM Disaster Risk Management ERRA Earthquake Reconstruction & Rehabilitation Authority FATA Federally Administered Tribal Areas FSC Food and Security Cluster FAO Food and Agriculture organization GBV Gender based violence GCM General Coordination MeetingGDP Gross Domestic Product GR General RationHOP Humanitarian Operations PlanHTC Humanitarian Country TeamHAP Humanitarian Accountability Partnership IDPs Internally Displaced Persons INGO International Non-governmental Organizations IRC International Red CrossKI Key Informant KP Khyber PakhtunKPK Khyber Pakhtun Khawa LRA Livelihoods Rapid AssessmentPDMA Provincial Disaster Management Authority MIRA Multi-sector Initial Rapid Assessment NFI Non food itemsNGO Non Governmental OrganizationNHN National Humanitarian NetworkNDMA National Disaster Management Authority NOC No Objection Certificate NNGO National Non-governmental Organizations PCM Policy Coordination MeetingPDMA Provincial Disaster Management Authority PLM Pregnant and lactating mothers


PHF Pakistan Humanitarian Forum NRC Norwegian Refugee CouncilNRW National Review Workshop SAG Strategic Advisory GroupSAP-PK South Asia Partnership, Pakistan SMC School Management CommitteesSPO Strengthening Participatory Organizations TLCs Temporary Learning CentresTSSU Temporary Settlement Support UnitTWG Technical Working GroupUC Union CouncilUN United Nations UNDP United Nations Development Programme UNESCO United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural Organization UNICEF United Nations Children Fund UNOCHA United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs UNHCR United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees WASH Water, Sanitation and Hygiene WFP World Food ProgrammeWHO World Health Organization WG Working groups


Table of ContentsAcknowledgement Abbreviations Executive Summary 01Proceedings 06Introduction and Objectives: 06Welcome address of NHN Chairperson: 06Session 1: Panel 1: Priority issues from affected districts: 07

Baluchistan: 07Punjab: 07Sindh: 08Khyber Pakhtunkhwa: 08Discussion/Question and answer session - 1: 09

Session 2: Panel 2: Challenges in reaching vulnerable communities: 12Shelter Cluster 12Food and Security Cluster 13Protection Cluster 13Education Cluster 15Nutrition Cluster 15Discussion/Question and answer session - 2: 15

Session 3: Panel 3: Recommendations: 19Recommendations by NHN Central Executive members: 19Comments of NDMA Chairperson: 20Vote of Thanks and the way forward by NHN Chairperson: 24

Annexes 25Annex 1: Concept Note: NHN National Review Workshop on 2012 Floods Response 26Annex 2: Workshop Agenda 30


01

Executive Summary

A half day National Review meeting was held in Islamabad by the National Humanitarian Network (NHN) on 15th November 2012. Its objective was to bring the voices of the disaster hit communities to the national arena. It consisted of 3 panels viz. 1) Panel 1: Priority issues from affected districts 2) Panel 2: Challenges to reaching the most vulnerable 3) Panel 3: Recommendations. At the end, the NDMA Chairman gave his comments.

The issues that were highlighted from Balochistan consisted of 1) issues in accessing affected communities 2) specific needs of women and children in affected districts 3) issues regarding the distribution of food i.e. expired food products distributed & baby milk powder distribution which were later on addressed by the PDMA 4) lack of shelter particularly faced by women 5) lack of coordination between UN and the Government. From Punjab, immediate issues highlighted were 1) inadequate early warning system 2) inadequate arrangements for the rescue of trapped people 3) inadequate dewatering equipment available within the districts 4) inadequate & improper temporary shelter 4) Lack of strategic plan of the district for disaster response 5) lack of information from district officials 5) delays caused by political conflict between provincial and federal government 6) the limitations in coverage of the MIRA exercise. Longer-term concerns; 1) lack of public awareness regarding disasters 2) the restoration work needed for prevention of damage ad disaster from Hill torrents. From Sindh the concerns shared were as follows: 1) the poor coordination between the Sindh and Baluchistan governments in this response 2) the vacuum created by an inadequate government response being filled by extremist groups conducting humanitarian activities. Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (KP) was not facing flooding this year but nonetheless faces a complex emergency i.e. 1) the deaths from drone attacks in KP/FATA 2) more than 300,000 IDPs needs not being met 3) further displacement expected from North Waziristan in December 2012; 4) problems caused by travel NOC issue.

Primary issues identified by women participants included 1) insecurity in camps 2) Gender Based Violence (GBV) 3) dowries destroyed.

From the floor, main concerns and responses raised in discussion 1 were as follows: 1) lack of women-focused needs 2) Lack of disaster preparedness 3) need to review implementation of international humanitarian standards 4) promotion of accountability through engagement with government 5) improving and learning lessons from past experience 6) provision of agriculture needs 7) improvement in the distribution system; improving governance 8) need to address root causes of disaster 9) need to launch an international appeal

Main issues highlighted by the Shelter Cluster (SC) were1) huge discrepancy between MIRA patterns and TSSU patterns on the maps as many people had returned to their places of origin or had left temporary settlements 2) the multi-sectoral needs of people in temporary settlements, and in returning to areas/villages of origin 3) issues of secondary and tertiary displacements 4) problems experienced due to eviction of many affected communities from public buildings such as schools etc. SC was working to address these challenges. Issues highlighted by the Food & Security Cluster (FSC) were 1) paucity of funds 2) the Government provided food basket was different from that of WFP’s, making the mapping of beneficiaries complicated 3) also data


02

compilation systems differed, making re-identification & comparisons difficult 4) challenges of security & protection 5) challenges of identification of areas 6) families affected by flood with income source were using 60% of income source to get food & other families going into debt for food. FSC was addressing these challenges by 1) doing ‘safe distributions’ a model by WFP i.e. counting female-headed households 2) inclusion of child beneficiaries. Issues highlighted by the Protection cluster (PC) were 1) the challenges in reaching vulnerable communities 2) low funding for protection activities 3) the lack of formal appeal process had created problems in fundraising & impacted the capacity & human resources of the clusters leading to lack of funding for NGOs 4) gathering of reliable information 5) raising the capacity of authorities to pay attention to groups with specific needs 6) security challenges 7) need for a dialogue with government colleagues on the eviction of IDPs from public building following the recent flooding. Issue highlighted by the Education Cluster (EC) was paucity of funds. An assertive approach of advocacy and resource mobilization was being undertaken to address this. Issues highlighted by the Nutrition cluster (NC) were 1) lack of understanding of the nutrition cluster activity 2) limited capacity to stage an adequate nutrition response (it should be integral to health system provision) & 3) lack of availability of sufficient funding.

From the floor, main concerns and responses in discussion 2 were as follows:

No. Concern Response from Clusters1. Agriculture & livestock support Available but limited2. Procedures regarding transfer of newly con-

structed shelters in the name of the womanProcedures being worked out

3. Definition of IDPs One universal definition; all people dis-placed from their place of residence

4. Lack accurate monitoring & evaluation systems

Issue recognized & being worked upon

5. Relief packages distributed by internationals were culturally inappropriate

-

6. Lack of transparency &/or accountability of all stakeholders/humanitarian actors

-

7. MIRA results/gaps & acceptance by PDMAs Initial rapid assessment so gaps to be ex-pected. Now DMAs have accepted it

8. UN/I-NGO attitude dominating the clusters & preventing full participation from others

Need to learn about it & to discuss atti-tudes at meeting level. PC had NGO & Govt. co-chair at district level; considered an effective strategy to remove outside imposition, contextualize the meeting & have local input

9. Government response not reaching the common person

-

10. Political interference in aid distribution -11. Shelter issues -


03

12. Severe lack of drinking water -13. Assistance only provided to government

schoolsClusters were coordinators & could only advocate to the government. Problems needed to be raised at district meetings so clusters could flag issues with government

14. Water stagnation -15. Role of PDMA in monsoon HOP Internal operational planning documents

guided how HCT wanted to go about the response;

16. Data from the most vulnerable not collect-ed; assessments unable to include people with disabilities & older persons

Guidelines had been distributed to clus-ter members, but much needed to be done. A&D task force had been working to include it in the work of other clusters and bring it to the attention of the govern-ment.

17. No feedback to ensure implementation -

The cluster heads added the following points: 1. The objective for all clusters was to focus more on preparedness; there was a

need to build alliances with long term actors, including civil society & have more permanent solutions as the international response was not constant.

2. Clusters guided the development of emergency response based on specific & comprehensive assessment.

3. Development of (as requested by NDMA) preparedness shelters that could be used prior to emergencies.

4. Trying to ensure that DRR was included in the project design of cluster members & in developmental shelter plan.

Recommendations by NHN included the following

The short term recommendations: 1. Provision of food, shelter and NFIs at grassroots level. 2. Health, education & support to vulnerable groups. 3. Need for renovating schools so education system could restart. 4. Provision of recovery grants to those affected. 5. Provision of agriculture support; the sowing season for wheat in Punjab and Sindh

had started and hardly any seed was available. 6. Cash grants. 7. Economic and livelihoods recovery.

Long-term recommendations: 1. Immediately look at infrastructure. Infrastructure destroyed in the disasters that

befell the country in 2010, 2011, 2012 must be reconstructed to the level that it


04

did not cause further threats/damages. 2. Special emergency funds must be allocated at federal and provincial level in case

of future emergency (next budget). 3. Designs of drainage systems (LBODs, RBODs, Sem Nallas etc.) needed to be

reviewed & improved. These drainage systems should not cause any more damage to human life.

4. Serious consideration needed to be given to capacity-building of NDMAs and PDMAs to deal with disasters effectively.

Dr. Zafar Iqbal Qadir, NDMA Chairman, thanked NHN for inviting him; he was of the view that there should be a dialogue with every possible stakeholder, to provide input to policy formulation; he expressed satisfaction that NHN had grown into formal, serious forum of social activists dealing with the development sector primarily and focused equally on disaster management. He expressed frustration at having to speak in English but stated that he would interact with community members in their language after the session. Responding to the statements & recommendations he said that while making preparation to mitigate the natural disasters, priority was shelter, food plus medicines; however need assessment was done by local department & a new system needed to be evolved for that. Regarding (flood) arrangements made by Government & NDMA, Federal Government allocated about Rs. 1.5 billion for providing food & shelter for the flood victims & funds were also provided by the respective Provincial Governments; more than 50,000 tents amounting to about one billion rupees were arranged. Contingency Plan was prepared much earlier. Regarding launching an appeal he argued that the experience of past year had been poor and so the policy was on self-reliance. Dr Qadir said, lack of coordination was partly due to the relative infancy of the DMAs setup by the Government, these bodies needed time. NDMA had gained some experience in the last 5 to 6 years; it was being passed on to the PDMAs & through them to the DDMAs. Regarding MIRA, he said that it was the first time it was used and so it would have many issues. Regarding infrastructure repair and maintenance, for small to/or medium term disasters, restructuring was possible but if it was national floods infrastructure repair, it required huge resources which government did not have. There was a need to assign priority to these works. Regarding rehabilitation of affected people and infrastructure, the NDMA Chairman said that Rs. 4 billion were provided by the Federal Government for the rehabilitation of affected people and infrastructure in Jafferabad, Naseerabad, Jacobabad, Kashmore & Shikarpur. PDMAs and DDMAs, in consultation with local stakeholders, were devising plans and projects for implementing this grant; it was expected that Rs. 4 billion more would be provided by the provincial governments as matching grants to enhance this amount to Rs. 8 billion. Regarding the recommendation that humanitarian community should provide long term strategy, NDMA had managed to sell a proposed checklist on DRR concerns to Planning Commission of Pakistan which it should consider before approving any federal funded project. A disaster impact assessment study would be done before approval of projects. He said that shelter provision was being done through UN and Govt. resources. Immunization of communities and livestock was being carried out by provincial departments, with support from WHO, UNICEF &FAO etc. Recognizing the importance of improvement in the early warning system, the govt. was implementing a big project with the help of UNESCO & other UN partners this year (2012) to/for enhancing the early warning capacity. Also trying to work out basic modeling of CBDRM so communities were aware of how early warning works. He said that school buildings in each community were to be improved


05

structurally to act as safe havens for the community & provide shelter to the whole community for at least 1 to 2 weeks with adequate stock of food, water & medicines. Regarding allocation of budget, money was made available this year; federal government had already provided 6 billion; Baluchistan gave 3 billion; KPK gave 7 billion. In Punjab, NDMA Chairman said, two districts were badly affected; DG Khan & Rajanpur. Nonetheless everyone affected was provided with food & drinking water & no hunger-related casualties were reported. Regarding RBOD, LBOD, Barrages etc., the waterways needed to be conserved & Sindh Government should be appreciated for passing a bill this year (2012) enabling it to remove encroachments & other obstructions from the river and canals. He concluded with the statement that he was happy to learn that civil society was actually alive to the issues; proud of civil society who had the courage and commitment to place a focus on these crucial concerns, arrange these kinds of synthesis workshops and develop recommendations. It was a good support to the Government & to NDMA as it provided forward steps to work on.

In concluding the NRW, Dr. Manzoor Awan thanked NHN provincial chapters for organizing the stakeholder consultations and participants especially people who had come from far flung areas. He appreciated NDMA chairman’s responding to every recommendation/issue. He pointed out that NHN was just a facilitator & every recommendation arose from the ground. He appreciated the leadership of NDMA Chairman, and his support of local & national voices in policy formulation. NHN members would continue to work voluntarily. NHN required further support to develop institutional capacities. He thanked PDMAs for participation. He said that local humanitarian capacity was needed to be built in DRR as well as ensuring quality and accountability in response. Empowered participation model was required. He requested that local NGOs should be considered as equal partners and should not be marginalized.


06

Proceedings

Introduction and Objectives:The National Humanitarian Network (NHN) held a National Review Workshop (NRW) on 15th November 2012 in Islamabad, Pakistan. Earlier, in preparation for the workshop, a concept note had been prepared & circulated that reported on the results of the provincial stakeholder meetings held in Punjab, Sindh and Baluchistan by NHN provincial chapters (concept note has been attached as annex 1). The overall objective of the workshop was to discuss the findings & recommendations of the provincial stakeholder consultations held by NHN provincial chapters at Quetta (Baluchistan), Sukhur (Sindh) and Multan SPO Staff member of SPO & Mr. Azhar Ghumro (SPO) (Punjab). These were attended by all stakeholders including community members/CSOs of affected districts. The specific objectives were to bring the 1) voices of affected communities to the national arena 2) to provide a platform for direct dialogue between communities, NGOs, UN Agencies, and relevant Government bodies. It was an opportunity for Islamabad-based partners to discuss the challenges of the 2012 response, and to hear from government, NGO and UN cluster partners about lessons learned during the 2012 response, along with recommendations for further strengthening of interagency coordination and response.

The workshop was moderated by Dr Saman Yazdani, NHN Central Executive Committee member. She outlined the procedure for the workshop, and the translation arrangements made to encourage full participation from community members in attendance at the workshop. Participants were welcomed to speak in English or Urdu. As many as 74 stakeholders from all over the country participated in the NRW. They included flood affectees of 2012 floods, representatives of NHN member organizations, relevant Government officials belonging to the Federal as well as Provincial Governments, media persons, and representatives of civil society organizations. Flood affectees (male & female) belonging to all the five flood affected districts of three provinces viz. Sindh (Jacobabad, Kashmore & Kandhkot), Baluchistan (Naseerabad and Jafferabad) and Punjab (Dera Ghazi Khan & Rajanpur) were also present. Also representatives of UN clusters like TSSU (Shelter Cluster), Food Security Cluster, Protection Cluster, Education Cluster and others like the WFP, USAID, FAO & UNICEF, participated.

Welcome address of NHN Chairperson:Dr Manzoor Awan, NHN Chairperson, formally welcomed the NRW participants & expressed his regret that humanitarian stakeholders in Islamabad had not earlier had the opportunity to consider the priority issues identified by community members & district-level humanitarian stakeholders. He thanked the organizers & participants of the three provincial stakeholder consultations held in October &November 2012 for bringing the 2012 floods response issues to the attention of stakeholders in Islamabad, &asked participants to challenge themselves to learn from the shortcomings of the current response & to address these deficits. He spoke of the need for workshop participants to plan an advocacy agenda for all the humanitarian community in response to the recommendations raised by communities &humanitarian stakeholders in the provincial consultations & also of the need to report back to these participants with the outcomes of the NRW.


07

Session 1: Panel 1: Priority issues from affected districts:

Baluchistan: Mr. Hameedullah Kakar, NHN Baluchistan Executive Committee Member , discussed the extent of damages in Baluchistan & provided a general breakdown of relief work conducted by Baluchistan PDMA. He highlighted access issues for NGOs in reaching communities; Dr. Saman Yazdani Khan no international appeal had been launched by the Government or the UN as yet. PDMA had limited capacity to respond. Communities were still in need as no NGO or UN was working there, only PDMA. He particularly mentioned the specific needs of women & children in affected districts who were taking shelter on the roads; also had health related issues; issues due to the approaching severe winter in certain areas (Jhal Magsi, Jafferabad etc.) & due to water being everywhere. He also spoke about government distribution of expired goods (through utility stores) to affectees & the distribution system was defective. Many people still needed relief items but PDMA was unable reach them. NGOs also had training needs and there were issues with the UN too.

Dr. Saman Yazdani Khan, reading out the recommendations of the Quetta (Baluchistan) consultation, drew attention to the fact that the winter had started & shelter & protection efforts for the affectees, including women & children, needed to be accelerated.

Punjab:Dr Benjamin Barkat, NHN Punjab Executive Committee member, outlined the ongoing issues in affected districts of Punjab (as detailed in the concept note). He spoke about the lack of proper functioning of the early warning system, which did not provide people with sufficient time to flee the affected areas; the inadequate rescue arrangements for the trapped people, as well as inadequate dewatering equipment available within the districts. Following the damage caused by the floods, there were inadequate & improper temporary shelter arrangements, as well as the overall lack of a strategic plan for the district for disaster response. Other issues included lack of adequate information, delays caused by political, conflict between provincial & federal government & the limitations in coverage of the MIRA exercise, which did not take place in D.G. Khan District Amongst longer-term concerns he mentioned lack of public awareness caused by illiteracy; the restoration work required on Hill torrents etc. He emphasized that local government was essential for better response & management of disaster situations. He recommended that government should take measures to improve the early warning system; restore infrastructure damaged by the 2010, 2011 & 2012 floods; remove obstacles & encroachments from hill torrents; appropriate adequate funds for natural disaster response; as well as building government and communities capacity in DRR & DRM. In terms of immediate actions required, he recommended that monitoring committees be established to oversee the distribution process of relief items; health facilities restored; WATTAN cards be provided to those affected & construction of a model village in D.G. Khan & repair DG as well as Kuchi canals embankments. He also mentioned the need for immunization for humans & livestock & improved coordination mechanisms NDMA, PDMAs & DDMAs. After he concluded, Dr Saman announced some administrative changes in the workshop schedule


08

i.e. Mr. Sartaj Abbasis from NHN Sindh provincial chapter was unable to attend and in his place, Mr. Naseer Memon, NHN Central Executive Committee member, would speak.

Sindh:Mr. Naseer, spoke in two languages i.e. Urdu and English, so as to facilitate the participants from the field. He elaborated on the recommendations surfacing from the provincial consultation held a few days earlier in Sukhur. He stated that a “Bermuda triangle” had been created in the centre of Pakistan consisting of upper Sindh, east Baluchistan & southern Punjab. This “Bermuda triangle” was particularly prone to hazards & vulnerable to natural disasters e.g. it suffered either from drought or floods. He stated that the cause of floods in previous years in Pakistan was an over flow from/of rivers & breach of the rivers. However, this year (2012), flooding resulted from excessive rainfall in traditionally low rainfall areas of Kashmore, Sukhur & Jacobabad districts. Rainfall records of almost 100 years were overturned and these districts were completely ill-equipped to handle this much water, resulting in urban flooding. The situation worsened further with flood water flowing in from Baluchistan & flooding other districts in Sindh too. He elaborated the need for more DRR/DRM action; he also outlined the link between the 2010 flood affected populations with many of those affected in 2011, and again in 2012. He spoke of the impact of the national government’s decision not to launch an international appeal, and emphasized the linkages between limited resource mobilization, low capacity, and weak response. He further argued that the government should be forthright about the resources available for disaster response & request assistance to cover the remaining needs. He also spoke of the limited resources of civil society to respond to community needs without funding from international donors & of the potential repercussions of the same as it provided an opportunity for extremist groups to walk-in with resultant unwanted consequences. He also highlighted the poor coordination between Sindh & Baluchistan governments in this response.

Khyber Pakhtunkhwa:Next to speak was Mr. Muhammad Amad, NHN KPK Executive Committee Member. He expressed relief that the October 2012 flooding had not been experienced in KPK. However, KPK suffered from a more complex emergency, the flood of terrorism & thunders of drone attacks. The death toll of more than thirty thousand (30,000) from former & 4000 by latter. He spoke of the need for one voice of civil society, Government, UN/NGOs & media in KPK & outlined the importance of all different actors having gathered under one roof here today. He sought support as KPK still had more than 300,000 IDPs whose needs were not being met, and the further displacement from North Waziristan expected in the future (December 2012). Organizations were reporting to the clusters that because of lack of sufficient funds, they could not organize an efficient response to the situation. Benjamin Barkat & Mr. Amad highlighted the problems caused by travel NOC issue for visitors (donors & partners) who needed to visit for monitoring purposes but found it difficult to do so in light of the NOC requirements. This resulted in resource mobilization problems particularly for FATA. He sought help in talking about this issue with local partner Govt. departments like NDMA, PDMA etc. He invited participants to attend a stakeholder forum in Peshawar in the coming months, and mentioned NHN KPK chapter’s work in establishing district-level groups, working with the newly established DDMAs.


09

Discussion/Question and answer session - 1:During the questions from the floor, Mr. Anteneh Gebremichael, Nutrition cluster, asked the Baluchistan panelist for more detail about the PDMA Baluchistan distributions, and whether they took place on a blanket or targeted basis. He also wanted to know about the milk powder distribution. He outlined the nutrition cluster standards and guidelines against milk powder inclusion in distributions as it disrupted normal nursing and complementary feeding. Mr. Hameedullah replied that PDMA distributions had been conducted through the Govt.; through the Deputy Commissioner (DC) office, the Tehsil officers and revenue dept. It had been done on a blanket basis through a small number of distribution points. Mr. Naseebullah Khan Bazai, from Baluchistan PDMA added that regarding the milk powder distribution issue, it had been raised by nutrition cluster colleagues on the 2nd November 2012 at the GCM meeting in Quetta & the PDMA had immediately taken action to stop milk powder distribution. He suggested that such issues should be raised during monsoon contingency planning. Regarding the concern about expired food distributed to affected districts in Baluchistan, he said that no expiration date was provided on the food packaging (purchased from the market); however, no serious medical issue had been resulted following the food distributions. He also said that other agencies were involved in food distribution than Baluchistan PDMA; NDMA through utility stores (federal) & argued that as bulk purchase had been done from the market, chances that some goods/ food may have been expired cannot be ruled out.

Ms Maira Zahur, UN Women, asked all the panelists that there seemed to be a lack of women-focused needs emerging from their talk. She requested further clarification on gender issues identified in the provincial stakeholder consultations. Mr. Naseer responded that although no separate session had been held with women yet women were very much part of the provincial stakeholder meetings. One of the primary issues identified by them had been increased cases of violence. Dr Benjamin added that women in the Punjab consultation mentioned the loss of a dowry which had been destroyed by the flood water & that was a big loss.

Ms. Jehanara, a government employee from Baluchistan, raised the question as to why the government & humanitarian community was not sufficiently prepared for the floods in 2012. Pakistan/we had faced this situation many times before but the government still seemed un/ill prepared & did not declare an emergency. In fact Govt. should have started to prepare as soon as the rains started. They could have helped the affectees in Sibi so that none came to Quetta. She (Jehanara) had taken many initiatives on her own to relieve the sufferings of the affectees & even faced reprimand from her seniors for her initiatives; however she had to do it as the affectees had no shelter and had other women related issues. Shelter was still a pressing need. Responding to her questions, Dr. Manzoor said that in fact this was the first year ever (2012) that a multi-sector contingency planning process had been conducted by all PDMAs & the humanitarian Áine Fay, Pakistan Humanitarian Forum stakeholders in Pakistan. Whether it was effective or not, whether there was enough capacity to respond or not; whether international humanitarian standards were being met or not, these were challenges recognized by the NHN workshops. Also the needs & issues of the most vulnerable like women, children & elderly were not highlighted as there was no segregated data. Ms Áine Fay, PHF Chair, asked the panel about advocacy efforts with the Punjab government regarding insufficient coverage of needs. She referenced to statements from Punjab government


10

representatives that all needs have been covered, which was contradicted by the reality in the affected districts. Dr. Benjamin replied that the Punjab PDMA representative at the Multan stakeholder consultation was very frank about the lack of resources of Punjab PDMA for floods response; the Punjab government did try to respond and were borrowing money as they were not adequately resourced. Thus the response was inadequate & people were still looking for help from the Punjab Government and this was pointed out in the Multan provincial workshop.

Mr. Taj raised the point that were the panelists promoting quality & accountability through engagement with government; what had happened in Baluchistan that the expired food was distributed to the wrong people, this should not happen again. Mr. Kakar responded that NHN had been informed by the community & they had taken up this matter. There was no date given on the food packets but the communities came to this conclusion after assessing the quality of the food items. He further said that there was an issue of lack of coordination between UN & the Government and these issues were being raised at relevant platforms. Later Dr. Manzoor Awan also responded & said that humanitarian accountability must be on the agenda of all humanitarian actors & that communities should be engaged in consultation processes prior to interventions, as well as being provided with a mechanism for complaints & feedback. He spoke of the need for NGOs to promote quality & accountability through engagement with government & referenced the improved coordination between NGOs & PDMA in Baluchistan.

Ms. Karen Moore, of CARE International, raised the need for the workshop participants to discuss why the 2012 response has been compromised by the recurring issues identified during 2010 & 2011 responses. She also asked that whether the communities who had been affected multiple times in recent years had seen any improvements in emergency response year on year? Mr. Doud asked the panel for details on the specific agriculture support needs, including both immediate and early recovery needs. Mr. Hameedullah replied that technical capacity-building is an ongoing agriculture need. Mr. Naseer stated that the most immediate agriculture need was dewatering, to salvage agricultural land.

Mr. Mumtaz asked that what measures had been taken to prevent poor food distribution from happening again? The government was here & the donors were here & they should look into it. Mr. Abdul Khaliq from Jafferabad, Baluchistan, raised the point that affected people were waiting at the tehsildar &patwari offices for the entire day for just one bag of flour (atta) whereas PDMA was reporting that 4/5000 affected people had received food packages; in actual fact, PDMA distributions were not reaching the flood, why was the UN not working effectively? So in short, he questioned the PDMA distribution system & why only PDMAs were doing distributions. Mr. Naseer replied that PDMAs should be facilitating NGOs & UN agencies to respond, and that not allowing the humanitarian community to launch an international appeal restricted the response. He underlined that clusters remain very important for information about needs & activities.

A gentleman from Sindh raised the issue of the distribution of expired food to affected districts in Baluchistan again and wanted to know if an inquiry was conducted regarding it? Mr. Hamsafar Gadhi, a journalist from Sindh drew attention that in Jacobabad district water was standing at various places and a large number of families, including women & children were camping in the open. He questioned the effectiveness of the NDMA in providing proper information and relief


11

to the flood affectees. Ms. Shabnam, from Rajanpur district & working for Pattan organization raised the point that the main issue of the affected communities in her area was shelter and not food & asked the panel what was being done about that? Mr. Fareed Zaman Butt, from Community Motivation & Development Organization, asked the NHN KPK member what was being done regarding advocacy on the travel NOC issues with PDMA KPK & whether the issue was within the PDMA’s decision-making capacity or not? Mr. Amjad Ali, of CARE International, asked about funding, its effectiveness & coordination?

Mr. Hameedullah Kakar stated that agriculture had been destroyed and whatever food had been stored had been washed way as well as firewood for cooking, agriculture instruments etc. He said that they could provide some agriculture support like seed & fertilizer, also conduct capacity building, training and some support in repairing channels, land for agriculture etc. Dr. Manzoor explained about the UN role. He said that at the Provincial NHN consultations, the UN clusters were also present; PHF/INGOs, NNGOs, PDMAs were all present. Particularly the Government had been very supportive & he appreciated the active participation of Mr. Naseer Bazai (PDMA Baluchistan representative) in the NRW; he had helped to clarify many things. However, he said that we needed to influence our governance system particularly governance in disaster management. We also needed to influence the government (PDMA/NDMA) so that they could facilitate the role of all other stakeholders, like UN, NGOs by launching an international appeal because people were dying &the UN &/or NGOs could not provide the kind of relief possible without adequate funding. The government should facilitate/allow other actors to work for humanitarian relief too. The clusters were effective and efficient and had full information about their work on the ground (The UN clusters will be in the next panel and will talk about their issues).

Mr. Amad responded to KPK questions and said that in KPK humanitarian advocacy efforts had led to improvements, such as shortened delays with travel NOCs. He also outlined that NGOs have learned from mistakes to improve responses in areas such as Swat, Charsadda & Nowshera. Mr. Amad said that civil society were still trying to recognize their role in KP/FATA; this was a very complex issue and that further discussions needed to take place between NHN & PHF members. He pointed to recent fruitful discussions with UNOCHA while developing the civil-military guidelines. NHN had discussed the access issue with security/military authorities but there was a trust deficit between the military & the humanitarian sector at all levels (UN, INGO, NNGO etc.). He spoke of the upcoming publication of Pakistan civil-military guidelines & the need for all organizations working in the region to use them. He further outlined ongoing database trainings for NGOs in KP/FATA that was being held/ with the help provided by UNOCHA. NHN KPK was working on different issues; they were identified and work was done on them.

At the end of the session, Mr. Naseer Memon responded to questions raised by Karen (CARE International). He said that the root causes of disasters in Pakistan had not been addressed; this was a key shortcoming. All humanitarian actors responded to a disaster but none talked about prevention. He specially referred to watershed mechanisms, riverine issues, quality of infrastructure etc. In terms of response quality, he spoke of marginal improvements in 2011 response following the experience of 2010 response. The UN system had been very good in teaching all on how to improve the quality of the response but quality was questionable due to the lack of resources mobilized. He said that the most immediate agriculture need was de-watering,


12

to salvage agricultural land. In the end, Dr Saman thanked the panelists for their contributions and announced a change in the workshop schedule, to provide a coffee break before the next panel.

Session 2: Panel 2: Challenges in reaching vulnerable communities:

Shelter ClusterMs. Maria Moita, Shelter Cluster (SC)/TSSU, introduced the work of the shelter cluster and outlined the primary objective of the cluster: to ensure that affected populations have access to shelter, in order to ensure dignity and protection from the natural elements. She detailed the cluster coordination structure, working with I-NGOs and N-NGOs to coordinate cluster work, in Baluchistan (with NRC) and at district level in Sindh (with ACTED). She outlined the three bodies within the cluster: Islamabad/provincial/district coordination meetings; the strategic advisory group (SAG) for strategic decision-making & improving proposals for funding & the technical working group (TWG) for technical coordination of shelter work. She highlighted the ongoing activities of the cluster in promoting coordinated strategies, compiling 4Ws which were the key to information gathering & updating, providing technical guidelines and capacity-building, producing maps, as well as needs and gap analysis for the sector.

Ms. Maria presented the needs and gaps from activities reported to cluster in the current response, based on MIRA findings, evidence was collected about damaged and destroyed houses. She highlighted current work with cluster members on priorities for winterization support, which made blankets a current priority for distributions. She also addressed the issue of ongoing gaps in Baluchistan affected districts, due to few organizations being able to deliver assistance in these areas. She described the work of the temporary shelter support unit (TSSU) within the cluster, to monitor movement patterns in displacement and examine multi-sectoral needs. She outlined the time line of the first TSSU survey, directly after the delayed MIRA exercise, and the work of the TSSU team in mapping the locations of temporary settlements, and looking at plans for return as well as obstacles to return, in order to assess the current needs of affected communities. She highlighted that some people needed support to go back to their place of origin, whereas other communities required temporary settlements because they cannot go back due to stagnant water. She invited anyone interested in working in these areas to attend cluster meetings at district/provincial/ Islamabad level and receive information so that targeted assistance can take place. In closing, Ms Maria stated that many people had returned to their places of origin or had left temporary settlements, which explained the huge discrepancy between MIRA patterns and TSSU patterns on the maps. She outlined the clear trend shown of movement to places of origin or urban areas since the MIRA assessment took place & explained that the TSSU team was now assessing areas that people had moved into in order to collect information about their needs. She highlighted the multi-sectoral needs of people in temporary settlements, and in returning to areas/villages of origin and how they were trying to help them there now. People may go back but it may not be their place of origin, so people are facing secondary and tertiary displacements. She spoke briefly about the problems experienced due to eviction of many affected communities from public buildings such as schools and referenced the ongoing work of the shelter, education and protection clusters on providing support to government to deal with the situation of IDPs


13

housed temporarily in schools, through development of proper guidelines. All this information was shared at the cluster meetings at district/provincial & national level & on their website. Dr. Saman provided an abbreviated Urdu translation of Ms. Maria’s presentation, and announced that all PowerPoint presentations would be circulated to participants on request.

Food and Security Cluster Mr. Rizwan Bajwa, Food Security Cluster (FSC), introduced the work of the cluster and the common structure of clusters, as presented by Ms. Maria. He outlined the different phases of the overall humanitarian coordination of food security response: the immediate phase focused on providing emergency food assistance (including emergency food distributions coordinated by WFP and household-scale rations through NGO cluster partners), and the later phases as water levels recede and families return. Then the food security cluster focus changes from food to direct agricultural and livestock support. He said largest number of the affectees was covered under World Food Programme (WFP) through NGOs. He said in 2012, hardly 20,000 households were targeted due to paucity of funds. He said other humanitarian actors also distributed food like the Pakistan army, NDMAs, PDMAs, civil society etc. The Government provided-assistance was different in commodity basket composition &WFP’s was different, making the mapping of beneficiaries complicated; also data compilation systems differed, making re-identification & comparisons difficult. Working in the field for humanitarian relief agencies, had many challenges, including security & protection, mapping of beneficiaries, identification of areas etc.

Mr. Rizwan outlined that organizations had learnt lessons and tried to improve their response in recent years, such as ‘safe distributions’ produced as a model by WFP – counting female-headed households (almost 10,000 identified and provided assistance in second phase of 2012 response). He also spoke of ongoing work to include child beneficiaries by WFP, which was taking place this year for the first time. He further presented evidence from LRA, that families affected by flood with income source were using 60% of income source to get food, with other families going into debt for food. He spoke about food remaining a priority area in this response, and the need for resources and distributions until the end of 2012. Translation by Dr Saman followed.

Protection ClusterMs Elisabetta Brumat, Protection cluster (UNCHR), after expressing her regret for not speaking the local language, introduced the work of the cluster and its presence at federal, provincial and district levels. She explained that the Protection cluster had an articulated structure with sub-clusters at each level, due to the span of activities within the cluster: UNHCR and IRC led the cluster, and then there were areas of expertise (Gender-based violence sub-cluster, Child protection sub-cluster, age and disability task force etc.) headed by UN Agencies and NGOs, in cooperation with the relevant authorities. She further detailed how district-level working groups (WG) were co-chaired by the district Social Affairs Department and an NGO district cluster focal point. She also explained the current main objective of the cluster and sub-clusters in the 2012 response: to ensure that during the disaster relief phase, groups with specific needs are adequately targeted so they receive sufficient support to their needs. She pointed out that while the responsibility to assist affected populations sits with the government, the PC (as all clusters) supports the government in an auxiliary role.


14

Regarding the challenges in reaching vulnerable communities, Ms Elisabetta outlined the information provided from government statistics (secondary sources) & the recent MIRA exercise about specific needs in affected populations:

• children under 5 represent 11/12% of the population affected.• children less than 14 years old represented 37-40% of the population affected • 48-50% women. • 2% of affectees were unaccompanied women with no support. • 6% of those affectees were the elderly.• 37% of the population assessed faced problems in receiving assistance. • 20% of Key Informants pointed to the exclusion of groups with specific needs. • 37% women might have problems in temporary settlements/camps.

Ms Elisabetta explained that the previously mentioned issues were triggers for activity of the PC. In 2012 the cluster had so far been working to build the capacity of authorities and partners. Child Protection sub-cluster has delivered specific training on Child Protection in emergencies; the cluster had also partnered with the shelter and food security clusters to deliver training on specific needs in beneficiary selection criteria. In addition, UNICEF and UN Women have seconded staff into the gender & child cell of NDMA/PDMAs, as well as ongoing work to support the social welfare department in developing referral mechanisms for marginalized groups in affected populations. During the 2012 flood response the cluster had also been active in the area of child protective services (41 child friendly spaces established in flood-affected districts with 7,300 children supported in these centres). Furthermore, there was ongoing communication of messages on child protection; the GBV sub-cluster also provided mobile units with psycho-social support to women survivors of violence. The PC was engaged with ongoing monitoring and consultation with the community, including specialized actors conducting counseling sessions in communities, to report problems to service providers, and inform about services.

Ms Elisabetta referenced the challenges faced by the cluster partners: 1) funding for protection activities was very low, for both UN & NGO cluster partners. More visibility of protection activities was also required. The lack of formal appeal process had also created problems in terms of fundraising, and this funding shortage impacted the capacity and human resources of the clusters & resulting in lack of funding for NGOs to carry out projects. She also spoke of the need for advocacy with government to launch a formal appeal; talking to donors about the current restriction as well as the 2) importance of maintaining attention on vulnerable communities through the PC; another challenge was 3) gathering reliable information; the PC continued to work on inter-cluster cooperation, including inputting questions into surveys conducted by food security cluster, shelter cluster, etc.; 4) raising the capacity of authorities to pay attention to groups with specific needs was also a challenge & was a part of the ongoing inter-agency training for local government. Finally, Ms Elisabetta spoke about the 5) security challenges mentioned by community members in the provincial consultations; she spoke of the need for cluster partners to monitor better and take action on security issues. She emphasized that security is firstly the responsibility of the government. She also mentioned that there was 6) pressing need for a dialogue with government colleagues on the eviction of IDPs from public building following the recent flooding. She outlined the competing rights in these issues, between the right to education and the right to shelter, and the need to convince government colleagues


15

to adopt mitigating measures. Further, displaced communities evicted from schools should be prioritized for assistance, specifically urgent shelter assistance. She also encouraged workshop participants to task themselves with initiating a dialogue and negotiating with government on the recommendations from the provincial stakeholder consultants, and thanked NHN for providing the material from the provincial consultations. Translation by Dr Saman followed.

Education ClusterMr. Amson Simbolon said that the Education Cluster (EC) was co-led by UNICEF and Save the Children, efforts for quick resumption of schooling and bringing back normalcy were being made to provide education to about 23,000 children by setting up Temporary Learning Centres (TLCs); the capacity building for teachers and SMC members and education supplies distribution in affected districts of Sindh, Baluchistan and Punjab was being carried out. He pointed out that the huge challenge to the education side of the children of affected areas was due to paucity of funds. Assertive approach of advocacy and resource mobilization was being undertaken to ensure the prioritization of Education in Emergency as part of response plan of humanitarian country team and Government of Pakistan. Cross sector collaboration with Shelter, Protection and WASH and other clusters and cross cutting working group was being carried out to develop a Guideline on Using School as Shelter and proposed alternative solutions. This cross sector collaboration was to protect the rights of children to access education and IDPs for protective shelter. Dr Saman translated.

Nutrition Cluster Mr. Anteneh Gebremichael, of the Nutrition cluster, introduced the work of the cluster; he said that it was led by UNICEF. He outlined some of the key issues affecting the nutrition cluster, including the confusion between nutrition & food security by many. He outlined that while food was considered an imminent need after the onset of an emergency, yet different groups of people among affected households i.e. the elderly, children & lactating mothers, all had specific nutrition concerns. Food distributions from different sources cater for the healthy adults, but did not focus on the nutrition needs of children & pregnant and lactating mothers (PLM). The nutrition cluster also provided rehabilitative and therapeutic care for vulnerable groups critically affected by malnutrition i.e. those with severe risk of mortality/morbidity & also moderate cases requiring rehabilitative care, in addition to preventative nutrition interventions. The main current challenges that he mentioned were 1) lack of understanding of the nutrition cluster activity 2) limited capacity to stage an adequate nutrition response (it should be integral to health system provision) & 3) lack of availability of sufficient funding. Translation by Dr Saman followed.Discussion/Question and answer session - 2:Mr. Khan asked questions from the FSC ad SC. He asked FSC that apart from distribution, what was the FSC doing for immediate plantation of the Rabi season and what was the response status? For the SC, his question was that it had been announced by the NDMA chairman that wherever shelter would be constructed, it would be transferred in the name of the woman (of the house/family). So had that been discussed in the shelter cluster? What would be the procedure forward?

For the FSC, Mr. Rizwan responded that FSC was composed of 2 agencies WFP/FAO. And FAO could best respond to what was being done for agriculture. The FAO representative present


16

in the audience said that it was going to launch an assessment to get an idea of the needs of the sector; funding had been an issue this time. However, they (FAO) were giving guidance to partners who would like to respond; priority was on the Rabi season & livestock support. As more information emerged, it would be shared. The SC responded that they would hold discussions with cluster members at all levels; it was very important that discussions were held at district level with beneficiaries & district authorities, than a joint strategy with PC would be developed.

(from left to right) Mr. Dur Mohammad Gorchani, from Rajanpur district, Mr. Abdul Khaliq from Jafferabad & (at the back in black head hijab) Ms. Shabnam, from Rajanpur district

PC responded that capacity-building was being done by UN Habitat through a manual on Pakistan property legislation; NGOs and authorities had been trained and training on property legislation was being provided to female lawyers. The action on the ground was that some projects of the PC that had a legal advice component found it difficult to find lawyers with specific background in property; it was difficult to provide that support in the districts. It was hoped that work by UN Habitat could bring some results.

Another question from the floor to the PC was that Government had stated that IDPs were people who get displaced by conflict or complex emergency and not natural disasters. Could this be clarified? PC responded that the internationally accepted definition of IDPS was that they (IDPs) constituted all people who were displaced from their place of residence irrespective of cause of displacement; this could be due to natural disasters or conflict or fear that something might happen. It had emerged that in the recent past the Government had some problems in using this definition; not sure why this had happened. However, no matter what one may call it, what was needed was to focus on the fact that these were people who had been obliged to move and because they were not in their houses, they had special needs. They remained citizens of the country, and continued to be the responsibility of the Government; they had a right to be assisted and protected by the government.

Mr. Taj, an NGO representative, commented that facts & figures were collected to make many reports, but what was needed was that more exact information about distributions & beneficiaries should be collected in order to judge the impact accurately. A monitoring & evaluation system needed to be created to gather accurate information on the distributions and also permanent solutions needed to be sought. The PC responded that monitoring of protection problems had issues; more capacity & resources were needed on the ground; the resource constraint affected proper monitoring.

Mr. G. N. Mughal, from Sindh, appreciated NHNs role in providing this platform. He had a comment addressed to the internationals & said that whenever there was a disaster, the internationals distributed packages of relief. However, at times these packages were culturally inappropriate & this needed to be addressed in order to improve usefulness. Another issue was the lack of transparency/accountability of all stakeholders, whether Government, whether international humanitarian actors etc. Another gentleman from Sindh had 3 questions/comments: 1) he pointed out that MIRA results/gaps had not being translated at PDMA level as they were not accepting the results and were not taking any action. How would the government refine strategic components


17

of plan? 2) Emergency activities were now regular, so response could now be combined with strategic plans; accessing long-term funding so as not to rely on government emergency appeal; 3) UN/I-NGO attitude dominated the clusters & prevented full participation from others.

Mr. Jon from OCHA responded that MIRA final report had been endorsed by all provinces & NDMA. It was the first global MIRA ever & was not flawless; continuous lessons were being learnt; right now there was an international workshop taking place that was going to analyze MIRA lessons of/in Pakistan. A pilot would have been preferred but as things turned out, the pilot became the real thing since the monsoon hit first. It had acted as the basis of the Humanitarian Operation Plan (HOP). Regarding HOP for the monsoons, there was no formal appeal for this response. Ideally, an appeal process would represent a consolidated needs assessment, prioritization, an objective framework of the response including the different strategies of all the clusters; it would also have to be projectized, so that different agencies could put in their projects. It would provide some level of guidance for humanitarian country team as to where appeal priorities were & how best to deal with them. Additionally, there would be indicators which would explain what the targets that were being achieved were. However, Pakistan was not the only country in the world that had issues with the appeal process; any appeal had to be launched in partnership with the Government. As an alternate to the appeal, there existed 2 operational plans in Pakistan to try to cover needs in the absence of an official appeal. Not an ideal situation but it was something that was workable in an emergency.

The PC responded that the objective for all clusters was to focus more on preparedness. Inter-agency training for officials at provincial & district level was needed; to move away from pure emergency attitude & build capacity. Humanitarians, however, were restricted to emergency response & these were issues that were developmental; there was a need to build alliances with long term actors, including civil society &have more permanent solutions as the international response was not constant. Regarding UN & international NGO arrogance, PC responded that we needed to learn about that & needed to discuss attitudes at meeting level. PC had NGO & Govt. co-chair (e.g. social welfare department) at district level; this was considered an effective strategy to take away any outside imposition, contextualize the meetings & ensure local inputs. EC said that lessons learned from previous responses were to focus on GR through TLCs. 30% of children at TLCs were first-time education beneficiaries.

Ms. Shabnam Naseer, from Rajanpur commented that all panelists had mentioned they supported the government. But government response did not reach the common person, so cluster system should change their approach & go through NGOs. The government itself was facing issues e.g. the free school books provide by the government had been washed way in the recent floods & no new books had been provided; also there was still a lot of water left standing in the schools. Children went daily to school & returned after trying to clean the mud & slush from the classrooms. The (government) schools did not even have enough funds clean the schools. The EC said that it was not the job of the cluster to provide textbooks but the government’s job. However, EC job was to advocate.

Mr. Dur Mohammad Gorchani, community representative from Rajanpur said that there was political interference in aid distribution. Politicians had offered cash & food help in exchange for


18

votes; taking an oath on holy book (Qur’an) from the beneficiaries that they would vote for him if they received aid. Only assistance received from local community organizations was neutral. Issues included shelter issues as houses had been flattened by the floods; also there was a severe lack of drinking water. Their needs were not being addressed. The SC responded that they need to hear priorities at district level meetings. So clusters can then flag issues with government. Clusters were not service providers but coordinators; they will collect information from the field to press government to provide assistance to the most needed areas. The community representative from Jacobabad pointed out that winter was approaching and there were insufficient shelter; water was going to be stagnant for next 3 months. The EC cluster was only providing assistance to government schools. Where these were not present, no assistance was being provided; but this should change and wherever there was a need, assistance should be given.

Mr. N. Bazai, the PDMA Baluchistan representative asked what was the role of PDMA in monsoon HOP? The validity of MIRA assessment, which was conducted only in two (2) villages of Baluchistan about a month back, was questionable. How could clusters ensure MIRA findings would be valid when programmes were being created from its findings? OCHA responded that MIRA is a KI feedback & observation tool for rapid assessment to guide the initial response to a disaster. What was required was a comprehensive sectoral assessment. Clusters guided the development of emergency response based on specific & comprehensive assessment. Internal operational planning documents guided how the HCT wanted to go about the response that was being implemented; a very different type of mechanism to international appeal. They were not working with CAP in Pakistan.

Mr. Talal, heading the Aging and Disability (A&D), pointed out that it was still a battle with assessments to include people with disabilities & older persons. Could the panelists respond as to whether they had inclusive services for older or people with disabilities in floods 2012. The SC said that guidelines had been distributed to cluster members, but there was much that needed to be done. The PC responded that A&D task force had been working to include it in the work of other clusters and bring it further to the attention of the government. A lot of work was still required in assessments to include A&D. MIRA was a superficial assessment; A&D was in the training curriculum for inter-cluster capacity-building of district authorities.

Ms. Shabnam pointed out that the system for collection of data was problematic. The KIs were conducted with well to do people. Data from the most vulnerable was not collected. The CWS representative said that monitoring mechanisms were in place for quality/accountability throughout the year, not just during emergency period? But there were no feedback to ensure implementation. The SC responded that they were talking to various organizations about accountability mechanisms and developing a cluster one. Ms. Mumtaz questioned that since 2005 Pakistan was facing disasters. UN/I-NGOs should have developed a good response model in one UC & then sold that model to all humanitarian actors. SC responded that they were looking into developing (requested by NDMA) preparedness shelters that could be used prior to emergencies. Also the EC responded that they were trying to ensure that DRR was included in the project design of cluster members & in developmental shelter plan. Abdul Khaliq from Usta Mohammed, Baluchistan, wanted to inform the Baluchistan PDMA representative that the food being distributed was not reaching the beneficiaries.


19

Session 3: Panel 3: Recommendations:

Recommendations by NHN Central Executive members:Mr. Naseer Memon, NHN CEC member & Chief Executive, SPO, spoke about the need to raise national level issues for recommendations. He said that for the last 3 years, country faced three huge disasters. In 2012, in particular, he said, areas like Nasirabad and Jacobabad received unusual rains. This year drought conditions were expected but rainfall created an opposite picture. Similarly, whereas flooding inundated north Baluchistan, for south Baluchistan water was being transported from Karachi for drinking purposes. Infrastructure, urban & rural, river etc. were not prepared to respond to these climate disasters. He said, in view of changing pattern of climate we also needed to revisit our protective infrastructure & roads and houses to avert any big damage in future.

Mr. Naseer Memon Secondly, most response in Pakistan is a reactionary approach. What was needed was to look into framework of response in Pakistan as a result of climate change onslaught. If we look at the outflow of barrages in 1976, these were higher than the 2010 flows but the latter caused far more damage (super floods). Rigorous environmental impact assessment was needed including screening of disaster risks; a paradigm shift was required to address disasters in Pakistan. Lack of early warning system, damage to watershed, damage caused by deforestation; all were root causes of recurrent disasters in Pakistan. On this eve, he posed a number of questions, such as: What are root causes of these disasters? What went wrong with River systems and Hill Torrents? How water shed has been devastated? How Mega water reservoirs have behaved during these disasters

Thirdly, the national government decided not to launch an appeal this year. Without international appeal there were insufficient resources to respond to a disaster and the feeling across the country was that response quality was not sufficient. Although in the long term what was need was to reduce dependency on aid yet we needed to be realistic about current capacity and take decisions in line with this. Where there were resources there was a strong response, but coverage was very poor due to lack of sufficient resources. Lack of international aid meant civil society could not respond as it was dependent on international aid flow and this vacuum was filled by extremist (faith) groups thus negatively impacting on political space. And one last thing was that we need to see the role of institutions in disaster response distribution? The effectiveness of PDMAs needs to be reviewed; there were issues of coordination between these institutions.

Mr. Irfan Mufti, from SAP-PK &NHN CEC member, said that it was welcome sign that the government had expressed disaster response as its responsibility; it showed their sense of ownership of the problem; to provide relief and support to people affected by disaster. However, after two months of the floods there was still a large gap between demand in community needs and supply. The response was not timely & furthermore it was a selective response in some areas; another wave of response was awaited from the government. The response so far had not been adequate. There had been political & other interferences in the aid response in some districts. This year early warnings were issued by NDMA during early 2012 and estimations of those who might be affected; however, very little preparedness was seen at the ground level when the floods


20

actually hit. The question was that why were the preparations and preventive actions not taken? Why was the government not prepared? This year was a moderate to middle-level disaster but despite that preparation for responding was inadequate. There were some other indicators of poor (expected) response by the Government: 1) the annual budget amount/figure separated for emergency support (500m rupees); which was very low; 2) poor coordination: this was the 4th/5th year of repeated disasters in Pakistan yet there were still issues of proper coordination between the different arms of the Government i.e. there was poor coordination between NDMA/PDMA/DDMAs and also with communities and other stakeholders; 3) there was insufficient preparation for basic emergency support for the initial relief stage of people affected by floods e.g. inadequate food distribution. And this was all happening in the context of the large economic cost attached to disasters. The GDP in Pakistan has been decreasing for last half decade. Amongst others, disaster was a major reason for this. Yet, knowing this, the Government had not prepared the infrastructure to handle the disaster. And last but not the least was to look at the current quality of response i.e. genuine support to people who needed it & not distribution through patronage.

Short term recommendations: The short term recommendations included the following:

1. Provision of food, shelter and NFIs at grassroots level. 2. Health, education & support to vulnerable groups. 3. Need for renovating schools so education system could restart. 4. Provision of recovery grants to those affected. 5. Provision of agriculture support; the sowing season for wheat in Punjab and Sindh

had started and hardly any seed was available. 6. Cash grants. 7. Economic and livelihoods recovery.

Long-term recommendations: Long term solutions included the following:

1. Immediately look at infrastructure. Infrastructure destroyed in the disasters that befell the country in 2010, 2011, 2012 must be reconstructed to the level that it did not cause further threats/damages.

2. Special emergency funds must be allocated at federal and provincial level in case of future emergency (next budget).

3. Designs of drainage systems (LBODs, RBODs, Sem Nallas etc.) needed to be reviewed & improved. These drainage systems should not cause any more damage to human life.

4. Serious consideration needed to be given to capacity-building of NDMAs and PDMAs to deal with disasters effectively.

Comments of NDMA Chairperson: Initial comments:Dr. Zafar Iqbal Qadir, NDMA Chairman, thanked NHN for inviting him; he was of the view that there should be a dialogue with every possible stakeholder, to provide input to policy formulation; it was important to have consultations with all relevant civil society for any policy to be sustainable,


21

he believed in the bottom-up approach. He tried to make sure that civil society was represented through all levels of policy regarding disaster management thus we saw that NHN now was also present at PCM. There was no other country that had civil society at the highest level of policy formulation. He expressed satisfaction that NHN had grown into formal, serious forum of social activists dealing with the development sector primarily and focused equally on disaster management. Such organizations provided services to the communities, those difficult to reach and acted as eyes and ears for NDMA etc. He expressed frustration at having to speak in English but stated that he would interact with community members in their language after the session.

Responding to the statements & recommendations Responding to the statements & recommendations by earlier speakers and concluding the day’s discussion, he dwelt at length on the performance of NDMA and the scale of its challenges. He agreed that most of the recommendations made by Mr. Irfan Mufti were true but simultaneously he remarked that some information was missing as far as his statement was concerned. He said, while making preparation to mitigate the natural disasters, they had always given priority to shelter and food plus medicines; the issue was that need assessment was done by local departments through their agents. He said that it was recognized that a new system needed to be evolved for conducting assessment; this issue was created this year in 5 districts about a month after the disaster had hit these areas. Talking of the arrangements made by the Government & NDMA, he said that the Federal Government allocated about Rs. 1.5 billion for providing food & shelter for the flood victims of the affected districts. Besides, funds were also provided by the respective Provincial Governments for this purpose. And, in order to meet the challenge for providing shelter to the affected people, more than 50,000 tents amounting to about one billion rupees were arranged.

He claimed that Contingency Plan was prepared much earlier with the additional fact that documentation was also done and it was also publicized much earlier through media. He said that preparations to this effect were also made by the provincial governments. However, he admitted that gaps were always there and said that this time particularly disaster came as surprise. He said even in a developed country like USA 100 lives were lost when cyclone hit its coasts. He did not agree with the opinion that hazards were created for not appealing for international aid. He argued that, “We had experience of last year that was why we were also relying on our own kitty and were confident that this disaster could be managed through indigenous resources.” In this regard, he said, he had also talked with the stakeholders, NGOs and the media.

Dr Qadir said, lack of coordination in the available mechanism had also been mentioned. He was in touch with different stakeholders like public representatives, media, civil society etc. He said it was not so easy to invent a fool proof system with one single stroke. He recalled that NDMA was a new system in Pakistan. The Government did not have required mechanism to face that sort of disaster from the time of the creation of the country to 2005. Disaster management had always been passed on to the armed force of Pakistan in the past. This was because of their professional training but at what cost? Cost was the relocation of the army from important assignments towards disaster support. The government had to come up with civilian mechanisms of disaster preparedness & response. To start with there was ERRA (after the 200 earthquake). Then NDMA in 2007; PDMAs in 2011 while this year (2012) district based DMAs were created. He said, these


22

organizations had been created now and all must let them grow and help them. They were only in the 1 or 2nd year of life so not too expect miracles or hassle free coordination and rehabilitation. He said that all learnt by doing, from lessons & from others. NDMA had gained some experience in the last 5 to 6 years; it was being passed on to the PDMAs & through them to the DDMAs. Institutional strengthening was being done via tools developed through the clusters. A cluster was a public private partnership.

In response to an issue raised, Dr. Qadir said that he agreed that every shelter had to have a toilet and a small kitchen within the domestic premises

Regarding MIRA, he said that it was the first time it was used and so it would have many issues. It was all about joint assessment by government and the clusters; however there was a need to refine technique and methodology. Next year there would be a better launch and version of MIRA. In this year (2012) there were 5 district piloted. He looked forward to the recommendations regarding MIRA emerging from the NHN workshop

Regarding infrastructure repair and maintenance, for small to/or medium term disasters, restructuring was possible but if it was national floods infrastructure repair, it required huge resources which government did not have. There was a need to assign priority to these works & implement them as/when able to mobilize sufficient resources.

Regarding rehabilitation of affected people and infrastructure, the NDMA Chairman said that Rs. 4 billion were provided by the Federal Government for the rehabilitation of affected people and infrastructure in Jafferabad, Naseerabad, Jacobabad, Kashmore & Shikarpur. PDMAs and DDMAs, in consultation with local stakeholders, were devising plans and projects for implementing this grant; it was expected that Rs. 4 billion more would be provided by the provincial governments as matching grants to enhance this amount to Rs. 8 billion. With this amount, he said, seed would be provided & other requisite inputs required for the cultivation of various crops in the disaster affected areas. He said PDMAs were strengthening provincial emergency response departments. They looked at the entire spectrum of disaster starting from preparedness, mitigation rescue tec.

Regarding the recommendation that humanitarian community should provide long term strategy, he said that this was strange recommendations since the humanitarian community was only responsible to provide rescue and immediate relief & not long-term strategy. However, Pakistan had a responsibility to work on long-term strategy. The government had to develop a strategy for engaging effectively with the humanitarian partners also. Humanitarian response should no doubt be well-planned & in this regard NDMA had managed to sell a proposed checklist on DRR concerns to Planning Commission of Pakistan which it should consider before approving any federal funded project. A disaster impact assessment study should be done before approval of projects and NDMA was working on modalities of how to proceed on that. Once that was done, then there would not be issues in the future like National Highways without culverts & bridges; or establishment of industries in low lying areas; & there would be a study much before the investment was approved.

He said the recommendation on shelter provision was understandable and they were working


23

on it; they had also asked the UN to roll out its stock of shelter. In view of approaching winter, NDMA would respond to requirements of winterization items being sent from bottom up i.e. from DDMAs & PDMAs. These bodies were assessing the requirements of blankets & other such items for this season in their respective affected areas and would pass it on to NDMA. Immunization of communities and livestock was being carried out by provincial departments, with support from WHO, UNICEF &FAO etc.

Recognizing the importance of improvement in the early warning system, Dr. Qadir said that was a big challenge. There was limited capacity and the govt. was implementing a big project with the help of UNESCO & other UN partners this year (2012) to/for enhancing the early warning capacity; putting additional water weighing gauges on rohit kois in Punjab and on water channels off Tarbela dam; that would provide enough time to plan monsoonal activities. There also had to be a proper system to predict national weather in advance. Also they were on trying to work out basic modeling of CBDRM so communities were aware of how early warning works & how it would work for them; what action would be required. He said that work was ongoing on school safety issues; school buildings in each community were to be improved structurally to act as safe havens for the community & provide shelter to the whole community for at least 1 to 2 weeks with adequate stock of food, water & medicines. Of course a survey needed to be done & huge resources were required.

Regarding allocation of budget, he had already mentioned that NDMA had been very vocal before the cabinet, the prime minister, the President etc. & had made a formal request to the government for DRM activities, for prior allocation of the budget & to get separate budget line in national & provincial budgets. Although it got late & the books on budget had already gone for print when this decision was taken, yet money was made available this year. Five (5) million was requested from the province of Punjab and Sindh each; three (3) million each from KPK & Baluchistan and kept the reserve of 5 billion of the federal government. Federal government had already provided 6 billion instead of 5 for disaster support. Baluchistan gave 3 billion for DRM activities to their PDMA, KPK gave 7 billion instead of 3 for DRM activities; they were the only province that did not need a penny of federal support. People in KPK were able to get the most effective response; before it became public they were already settled.

In Punjab, NDMA Chairman said, two districts were badly affected; DG Khan & Rajanpur. In DG Khan, the torrential water came downstream & overflowed from the Kachi canal & next it over- topped the DG canal (the 2nd line of defense), not because of any maintenance flows or human error but due to excessive water coming from the Koh-e-Suleiman (mountain) range resulting in inundation of 10 % of DG City & over 200,000 population within a few hours. However, water from DG city was driven out within 24 hours. This showed the level of preparedness & level of response. Rajanpur city had been saved. However, the rural areas around it were still inundated; nonetheless everyone affected was provided with food & drinking water & no hunger-related casualties were reported. There might be some who seemed to be starving but they were living in this condition before the emergency hit (‘otherwise vulnerable’ & not a disaster impact).

Regarding RBOD, LBOD, Barrages etc., the waterways needed to be conserved. The government had been negligent on its maintenance of flood infrastructure (cleaning of rivers & canals,


24

etc). Although efforts had been made yet these were not sufficient. The carrying capacity of the waterways, rivers and canals had reduced & this became crucial when the community was living in the Kacha areas around it. There was a need to legislate and they were working on recommendations for provincial Govt. on how to amend their canal and waterways with a view to delimit the water bodies and remove encroachments in those areas where the water might pass through. That had to be cleaned. Unfortunately, the river & canals had many encroachments which created hurdles in the smooth flow of water resulting in disasters. Sindh Government should be appreciated for passing a bill this year (2012) from its Assembly enabling it to remove encroachments & other obstructions from the river and canals. These encroachments should be removed and he hoped that other Provincial Governments would also do that sort of legislation in due course of time.

He apologized for taking longer than usual but it was important that he share the government’s perspective; he was very thankful for the opportunity to learn that civil society was actually alive to the issues; proud of civil society who had the courage and commitment to place a focus on these crucial concerns, arrange these kind of synthesis workshops and develop recommendations. It was a good support to the Government & to NDMA as it provided forward steps to work on. All of the issues were true, and most of them were very relevant for NDMA.

Vote of Thanks and the way forward by NHN Chairperson:Dr. Manzoor Awan thanked NHN provincial chapters for organizing the stakeholder consultations. He also thanked the participants especially people who had come from far flung areas. NHN had just started it consultation and was striving for common purpose through civil society. NHN had 180 members and outreach at district and UC level. He appreciated NDMA chairman’s responding to every recommendation/issue raised today. He pointed out that NHN was just a facilitator here & every recommendation arose from the ground; it was important to raise the issues from the field. NNGOs had struggled to advocate for a national disaster management system in Pakistan in 2003; this was not approved until 2005 (UNDP were working on it also). Earthquake in 2005 triggered the establishment of disaster management authorities & now they were present in all provinces. He appreciated the leadership of NDMA Chairman, and his support of local & national voices in policy formulation. Some PDMAs were still not functioning but it was a journey and only 2 years old. NHN members would continue to work voluntarily. He appreciated the input from Ms. Joe Read and the NHN provincial workshops. He also thanked CARE and ACTED for supporting participation of community representatives. NHN required further support to develop institutional capacities. He thanked PDMAs for participation and underlined the importance of PDMA’s participation in consultative meetings so that both sides improved understanding of each other. Also thanked UNOCHA and PHF for extending invitation, SPO for organizing the consultations and this workshop. He said that local humanitarian capacity was needed to be built in DRR as well as ensuring quality and accountability in response. Empowered participation model was required. He requested that local NGOs should be considered as equal partners and should not be marginalized. NHN would be working to enhance local NGOs and facilitating mechanisms of PDMA at local level; however these should be facilitating mechanisms & not controlling mechanisms. NDMA facilitated humanitarian actors to work but bureaucratic systems still existed.


25

Annexes


26

Annex 1: Concept Note: NHN National Review Workshop on 2012 Floods Response

For 15 November 2012, Islamabad Club, 2012 Floods Response in Balochistan, Punjab and Sindh: Priority Issues Identified by Stakeholders

IntroductionIn order to raise the voices of affected communities, and to provide a platform for direct dialogue between communities, NGOs, and Government bodies, NHN facilitated multi-partner workshops in Quetta, Sukkur and Multan during October and November 2012, to provide members of the humanitarian community with the opportunity to engage directly with communities affected by the 2012 monsoon and to hear their concerns.

Due to the mixed participation of community members and NGOs at these events, all three of the workshops covered issues of concern to those working to provide assistance to affected communities, as well as the needs of those impacted directly by the monsoon. The workshops raised issues specific to the affected districts of Rajanpur, Dera Ghazi Khan (Punjab), Kashmore, Jacobabad, Shikarpur (Sindh), Nasirabad, Jaffarabad, Qila Saifullah, Jhal Magsi, and Loralai (Baluchistan); however, there were also themes that appeared across the provincial workshops. This paper outlines key issues and recommendations made by participants in stakeholder consultations for the purposes o discussion at the National Review Workshop.

Common themes identified by stakeholders in Baluchistan, Sindh and Punjab:• Stagnant water• Temporary shelter needs• Livestock/agriculture losses• Occupation of school buildings• Sense of insecurity / rule of law deterioration • Emergency food and water requirements• Blankets/NFI needs• Health concerns• Insufficient response from government/NGOs• Limited resources of District government

Needs in DetailThe issues identified below do not form a comprehensive inventory of all of the support required by affected communities, but do provide a snapshot of those priority issues identified by representatives from communities, NGOs and provincial/district government during the late October/early November period. The level of detail provided was dependent on the number and diversity of participants in attendance at the workshop, which was inconsistent between the three events, particularly as regards government participation; for a detailed list of participants and the districts represented please contact SPO.

Province-specific issues arising from Quetta stakeholder consultation:• Restrictions on NGO access to affected areas


27

• Lack of appeal from government to NGOs • Government preference to respond directly but limited capacity• Communities still in need of food, water, shelter, blankets, NFIs• Lack of funding for Districts to respond• Government distribution of expired food • Health interventions required, especially by women• Agricultural support required (livestock)• Lack of community consultation

Province-specific issues arising from Sukkur stakeholder consultation:• Communities still in need of food, water, shelter, blankets, NFIs • Agricultural support required (livestock and fisheries)• Stagnant water requiring drainage (and sanitation response)• Slow response from government and limited NGO response to community needs• Wash/Health/Hygiene interventions required • Lack of funding for Districts to respond • Occupation of schools • Winterization support required • Deterioration in law and order • Specific support required by pregnant women and the elderly

Province-specific issues arising from Multan stakeholder consultation:• Communities still in need of food, water, shelter, blankets, NFIs• Stagnant water requiring drainage (and sanitation response)• Agricultural support required (livestock)• Occupation of schools • Gender-based violence and child protection concerns• Community insecurity• Destruction of dowries• Lack of communication/coordination between government institutions• Lack of funding for Districts to respond • Lack of participation of less privileged, minority and marginalized communities in

community consultation• Poor capacity of the government and non government actors• Lack of information from District administration • Political and tribal chief interference• Poor coverage in registration of affected communities (particularly hill torrents)• Lack of first aid facilities• Health interventions required• Ineffective distribution system for relief supplies (and lack of monitoring)• Lack of community consultation

Evaluation of ResponseCommunity members and NGO participants discussed the level of response received during the past weeks with PDMA (and some district government) representatives in attendance at the stakeholder consultation workshops, and provided feedback on the quality and coverage of the


28

response.

In the first instance, all districts reported response from local civil society, CBOs and philanthropists, though response from political parties and religious groups was lower than anticipated by some communities. On the government side, the Health Department was mentioned specifically for its response, as the first government Department encountered by communities on the ground.

The MIRA process was mentioned by participants in two provinces (Baluchistan and Punjab), where community members expressed frustration that action hadn’t been taken to address issues raised with enumerators (expired food in Baluchistan), and that local people hadn’t been consulted during the process (Punjab). Both cases point to the limited understanding of the MIRA process and its purpose, and suggest the need for feedback to districts about the findings of the MIRA and further planned assessments. The primary complaint received from stakeholder’s at all three consultations was the timeliness of the response, and the limitation in coverage of affected communities. The provincial government’s preference to respond directly was noted by a number of participants, who pointed to the lack of sufficient funds for PDMA/district response.

In terms of the quality of the response, participants in Multan pointed to problems with the distribution system and the need for monitoring of government, UN and NGO distributions, in addition to community consultation about distributions and other interventions. In Quetta, a specific issue was raised with response quality, regarding the spoiled food distributed to affected communities through the PDMA food distributions.

Overwhelmingly, communities and NGOs pointed to ongoing need for food, water, shelter, and NFIs by those affected by the monsoon, and the need for greater NGO/UN involvement to bolster the ongoing government response.

Remaining Needs / RecommendationsProvince-specific recommendations were considered at each of the workshops, many of which require support from the Islamabad level, or would benefit from coordination between humanitarian stakeholders across the provinces. These recommendations should not be considered final, nor are they the unanimous opinion of all three workshops, or of NHN members.

Quetta workshop recommendations:• Response priority is shelter, food and NFIs• Government to declare emergency and request NGO support• Baluchistan government should overhaul its emergency response department

(and establish an independent cell)• Disaster institutions require support to become fit for purpose• Long term strategy should be developed by humanitarian partners to respond to

and rehabilitate affected districts• Advocacy at national level required for sustainable rehabilitation in Baluchistan

affected districts• Infrastructure development should be well-planned and in line with DRM strategies • Provincial Steering Committee of Baluchistan (comprising of 10 different political


29

parities) along with NHN should seek advocacy with donor organizations support in relief and rehabilitation work

• Death compensation to the affected families from the Government of Baluchistan (announced previously)

• Cluster approach roll-out to affected districts• Rehabilitation support to affected farmers (Watan Cards)• Shelter provided to those in temporary or host accommodation• Infrastructure requirement (bridge construction and Pat-feeder and Kherthar

canal protection) • Excavation of SAM NallaS

Sukkur workshop recommendations:• Response priority is shelter, food, health and sanitation• Separate latrines urgently required (for use by women and children)• Government to declare emergency and request NGO support• Joint needs assessment by provincial and district government, UN and NGOs• Notification of Ghotki and Qamber Shahdadkot districts and provision of relief to

affected people in these districts • Temporary shelter should be provided to IDPs to allow for the use of school

buildings or educational purposes• Government plans required for rehabilitation and reconstruction of infrastructure

in the flood-affected districts• Protection should be provided to local humanitarian workers in flood affected

districts• Security concerns need to be addressed in temporary camps (vulnerable groups

particularly)• Winterization items should be provided to affected communities • Relief supplies should be provided to communities living in temporary camps

Multan workshop recommendations:• Response priority is shelter, food, and health• Monitoring committees required for relief distributions• Community consultation and coordination with communities required• Immunization of communities (and livestock) needed• Provision of WATTAN and ration cards to affected communities in hill torrents• Improvements required to early warning system• Capacity-building of government institutions required• Restoration and maintenance of infrastructure required (including water supply

and sewage systems)• Improved watershed management required (including hill torrents water routes)• Repair of DG and Kuchi canals embankments• Provision of the DRR and DRM training to communities• Construction of model village in the DG Khan• Allocation of adequate funds for the DRR and DRM needed


30

Annex 2: Workshop Agenda

09:00 – 09:15 Registration09:15 – 09:30 Welcome from NHN Chairperson09:30 – 10:00 Panel 1: Priority issues from affected districts10:00 – 11:00 Panel 2: Challenges to reaching the most vulnerable11:00 – 11:15 Coffee Break11:15 – 12:00 Panel 3: PDMA reflections on 2012 responses12:00 – 12:45 Panel 4: Rapid mobilization of assistance and recommendations12:45 – 13:00 Summary and Closing by NDMA Chairman

nhn’s national stakeholders review workshop on pakistani...

Documents